>
> "bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> 1 SLR doesn't have batteries of any kind.
>>>>
>>>> What is it?
>>>>
>>>> BugBear
>>>
>>> I think there may be more than one - certainly my old Zenit EM didn't
>>> need no batteries, not even for its light meter. Sadly to use one
>>> nowadays you would need to hunt down M42-mount lenses, and the selenium
>>> cells used to only last 20 years or so... )O:
>>>
>>> Quite a few old slr's had fully mechanical shutters, so the only thing
>>> you lost was the metering.
>>
>> yes - but IIRC no batteries at all was rare.
>
> There are quite a few fairly recent SLRs that work without batteries: the
> OM-1n, FM2, and FM3a all work fine without batteries.
>
I use a Mamiya TLR, no meter and totally mechanical.
(still saving for my first DSLR)
For a meter I just use a Kodak exposure chart and eyeball it.
I bracket a bit just in case I am off, but I imagine the film/developing may
not be cost effective in comparison to digital batteries.
Alternatively I have a Contax Aria. It takes a battery but it lasts a long
time. It is a manual focus camera and the battery is only there for the
film motor and the metering.
I am going camping for a week or so later this summer where I will be away
from power and car for the entire time. I intend to take my Mamiya on that
one.
> Anyone had any experience with photographing for over a week where there
> is no electricity.
>
> I am guessing that the two main options are to take a lot of charged
> batteries, or maybe the safest way would be to take film bodies instead.
>
> Are there any other viable solutions to be able to shoot digital without
> worrying about power, such as solar charging devices, etc?
Sure - lots of options. A gasoline generator - solar charger . . . Last
year I bought a 40 watt solar panel to charge the batteries in our travel
trailer so we can be 'out' indefinitely and still run my wife's CPAP
machine.
Jake wrote:
> Anyone had any experience with photographing for over a week where there
> is no electricity.
>
> I am guessing that the two main options are to take a lot of charged
> batteries, or maybe the safest way would be to take film bodies instead.
>
> Are there any other viable solutions to be able to shoot digital without
> worrying about power, such as solar charging devices, etc?
For solar, you'll want the following items (all the links are to the
items on Amazon):
1. Solar panel, about 15 watts ("http://tinyurl.com/58tv2n")
2. Charge controller ("http://tinyurl.com/5g3xfr")
3. 12 volt gelled electrolyte lead-acid battery (get a 7AH battery, as
it's most common and inexpensive) ("http://tinyurl.com/67mhzs")
4. DC battery charger for the Li-Ion packs ("http://tinyurl.com/6jd4ox")
5. Cigarette lighter socket attached to the battery (get a 12 volt
outlet splitter and cut off the plug and attach the wires to the
battery) ("http://tinyurl.com/6335kt")
You should be able to do it all for under $200.
Bring along a butane powered soldering iron for any repairs that you may
need to make.
Also, remember that a 12V 7AH battery is 78WH, while a typical D-SLR
battery is about 14WH. Even allowing for the inefficiencies of the DC-DC
charger, you can charge three or four Li-Ion batteries from just the
energy inside a fully charged 78WH battery, even without recharging it
from solar.
It'll take at about eight hours of strong sunlight to charge a 12V 7AH
lead-acid battery with a 15W charger, and this will charge about three
Li-Ion packs.
I think what I'd do is to ensure that you also have the battery grip for
the D-SLR that can take AA cells. Buy a load of Energizer lithium AA
batteries from Wal-Mart or Target, and at the end of the trip return
what you didn't need (which is hopefully all of them).
David J. Littleboy wrote:
> "bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> 1 SLR doesn't have batteries of any kind.
>>>> What is it?
>>>>
>>>> BugBear
>>> I think there may be more than one - certainly my old Zenit EM didn't
>>> need no batteries, not even for its light meter. Sadly to use one
>>> nowadays you would need to hunt down M42-mount lenses, and the selenium
>>> cells used to only last 20 years or so... )O:
>>>
>>> Quite a few old slr's had fully mechanical shutters, so the only thing
>>> you lost was the metering.
>> yes - but IIRC no batteries at all was rare.
>
> There are quite a few fairly recent SLRs that work without batteries: the
> OM-1n, FM2, and FM3a all work fine without batteries.
>
I was thinking of "don't use batteries" as opposed
to continue working (presumably with reduced function,
probably metering) without them.
On 08-Jul-08 11:00:28, David J. Littleboy said
>"bugbear" <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> wrote:
>> Mark Thomas wrote:
>>> bugbear wrote:
>>>> Alan Browne wrote:
>>>>> 1 SLR doesn't have batteries of any kind.
>>>>
>>>> What is it?
>>>>
>>>> BugBear
>>>
>>> I think there may be more than one - certainly my old Zenit EM didn't
>>> need no batteries, not even for its light meter. Sadly to use one
>>> nowadays you would need to hunt down M42-mount lenses, and the selenium
>>> cells used to only last 20 years or so... )O:
>>>
>>> Quite a few old slr's had fully mechanical shutters, so the only thing
>>> you lost was the metering.
>>
>> yes - but IIRC no batteries at all was rare.
>There are quite a few fairly recent SLRs that work without batteries: the
>OM-1n, FM2, and FM3a all work fine without batteries.
I'm pretty sure my original Zenith used no batteries - and had no meter,
which was how I developed my awesome exposure estimatation abilities
Later ('82) my Pentax ME Super included a 125th shutter mode where no
batteries were required - as long as you used 125th!
All the best,
Angus Manwaring. (for e-mail remove ANTISPEM)
Jake wrote:
> Anyone had any experience with photographing for over a week where there
> is no electricity.
>
> I am guessing that the two main options are to take a lot of charged
> batteries, or maybe the safest way would be to take film bodies instead.
>
> Are there any other viable solutions to be able to shoot digital without
> worrying about power, such as solar charging devices, etc?
>
>
Jut how did you get around to take all these pictures?
Do you walk?
Do you drive a car, that needs gas?
1. Small portable generator
2. 12VDC to 120VAC inverter.
3. Get a camera that is not a power hog. There are many
that can take 100's of pictures on one charge.
On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 01:03:04 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
<ozcvgtt02@sneakemail.com> wrote:
>bobs@yeruncle.com <bobs@yeruncle.com> wrote:
>
>> If you use a DSLR, you can get 500 or 700 or maybe more pics on 1 charge... A
>> P&S camera will only take a few dozen...
>
>That depends on the P&S, for some "a few dozen" is really 'several
>hundred' (measured per CIPA standard).
I'm just going by my own camera experiences.
>> If you can carry a fair amount of weight, you can bring a big battery and an
>> inverter to run your cameras charger.
>
>Or justr bring a couple batteries for the camera. 20 lbs in
>LiIon accumulators is quite a bit of power ...
Yes, but compare prices... a camping inverter is under $50 as opposed to camera
batteries at what - $100 each?
On Jul 7, 1:52*pm, "Jake" <m...@privacy.com> wrote:
> Anyone had any experience with photographing for over a week where there is
> no electricity.
>
> I am guessing that the two main options are to take a lot of charged
> batteries, or maybe the safest way would be to take film bodies instead.
>
> Are there any other viable solutions to be able to shoot digital without
> worrying about power, such as solar charging devices, etc?
Film, a manual body like a Nikon FM, Olympus OM-1n and a cadmium
sulfide light meter.
Re: Photographing Where No Electricity Source 
Linear Mode
